Recently looked at a few more blockchain game pools, and the more I look, the more it feels like a replay of old incidents: produce as much as possible, and inflation just opens the floodgates. The early players who enjoyed the benefits are gone, and the remaining ones can only "sell their output" to each other in the pool, basically borrowing future purchasing power in advance. You see the APR on the dashboard looks good, but if the buying demand relies on new entrants, it will eventually collapse.

What's more embarrassing is that project teams distribute rewards while trying to control prices; the result is either buybacks that are like squeezing toothpaste or changing rules, and in the end, players lose patience. Now, looking at the blockchain game economy, I have to ask: who actually needs the "stuff" produced? Otherwise, inflation is just chasing liquidity.

These days, someone also uses ETF capital flows and U.S. stock market risk appetite to explain crypto price movements, and it sounds plausible, but I always feel that no matter how the external wind blows, the first to die in small pools like blockchain games are still the internal inflation issues. Anyway, I’m keeping an eye on that word: "opening the floodgates." When real trouble comes, it’s probably because of that.